The U.S. Supreme Court case Sinochem International Co., Ltd. v. Malaysia International Shipping Corporation in 2006 revolved around a dispute between the two companies over a contract for shipment of steel coils from Philadelphia to China, with Sinochem alleging that Malaysia had misrepresented the condition of the goods upon arrival in China and thus breached their agreement. The key issue before the court was whether or not it was necessary for federal courts to establish jurisdiction before dismissing a suit on grounds of forum non conveniens (the legal principle that allows courts to dismiss cases which would be more appropriately heard elsewhere). In this case, Malaysia argued that Chinese courts were better suited to hear this matter due its connection with Chinese law and parties involved being based there. In an unanimous decision delivered by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the Supreme Court ruled that federal district courts do not have to first determine if they have jurisdiction over such disputes before dismissing them under forum non conveniens doctrine; instead they can use discretion when determining if another country's court is more appropriate venue for hearing particular lawsuit.

In the case of Sinochem International Co., Ltd. v. Malaysia International Shipping Corporation, there was no dissenting opinion recorded by any justice of the Supreme Court. The court unanimously ruled in favor of Sinochem, deciding that a federal district court has discretion to dismiss a case on grounds of forum non conveniens before determining its jurisdiction over the subject matter or personal jurisdiction over parties involved in the suit. This decision allowed courts to avoid unnecessary adjudication and promote judicial efficiency when it is clear that another more suitable forum exists for resolving disputes between parties.